Compiled by Alexei Birkun, Jr. (Brema Laboratory)

Transcription

1 Agreement on the Conservation of Cetaceans of the Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea and Contiguous Atlantic rea (ACCOBAMS) and The Commission on the Protection of the Black Sea Against Pollution (The Black Sea Commission) Conservation Plan for Black Sea Cetaceans Photograph by Sergey Krivokhizhin Compiled by Alexei Birkun, Jr. (Brema Laboratory) in consultation with Ana Cañadas, Greg Donovan, Drasko Holcer, Giancarlo Lauriano, Giuseppe Notarbartolo di Sciara, Simone Panigada, Gheorghe Radu and Marie-Christine Van Klaveren November 2006

2 CONTENTS I. Introduction II. Conservation status of Black Sea cetaceans III. General approach, goals and objectives IV. Actions Consolidation of regional and national legal system Action 1. Broadening the ACCOBAMS scope Action 2. Proper conservation status of cetacean populations Action 3. Cetacean conservation approach in fishery regulations Action 4. Improvement and harmonization of national legislation Assessment and management of human-cetacean interactions Action 5. Retrospective analysis of human-induced cetacean mortality Action 6. Strategy for reducing cetacean bycatches Action 7. Mitigation of conflicts between cetaceans and fishery Action 8. Elimination of live capture of Black Sea cetaceans Action 9. Mitigation of disturbance caused by shipping Action 10. Management of threats from gas-and-oil producing industry Habitat protection Action 11. Network of existing protected areas eligible for cetacean conservation Action 12. Special marine protected areas dedicated to cetacean conservation Research and monitoring Action 13. Basic cetacean surveys Action 14. Cetacean photo-identification programme Action 15. Regional cetacean stranding network Capacity building, collection and dissemination of information, training and education Action 16. Strategies for capacity building and raising awareness Action 17. Access to information and cetacean libraries Responses to emergency situations Action 18. Measures for responding to emergency situations V. References Annex 1. Excerpt from the ACCOBAMS International Implementation Priorities for : Action 6 Annex 2. Excerpt from the Report of the 2nd Meeting of the ACCOBAMS Scientific Committee: Recommendation 2.4 Annex 3. Examples of cetacean research and conservation projects implemented in the Black Sea region in Annex 4. Excerpts from the Checklists for Red List Assessment of Black Sea cetaceans (IUCN/ACCOBAMS Workshop, Monaco, March 2006) Annex 5. Minutes of the Round Table on the Conservation of Black Sea Cetaceans (Istanbul, Turkey, May 2006) Annex 6. Recommendation of the 4th Meeting of the ACCOBAMS Scientific Committee (Monaco, November 2006) Correct citation of this document: Birkun A., Jr., Cañadas A., Donovan G., Holcer D., Lauriano G., Notarbartolo di Sciara G., Panigada S., Radu G., and van Klaveren M.-C Conservation Plan for Black Sea Cetaceans. ACCOBAMS, Agreement on the Conservation of Cetaceans of the Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea and Contiguous Atlantic Area. 50 pp. Expertise: The Conservation Plan was considered at the 3rd Meeting of the ACCOBAMS Scientific Committee (Cairo, Egypt, May 2005) and the ad hoc Round Table on the Conservation of Black Sea Cetaceans (Istanbul, Turkey, May 2006). The improved plan was adopted and commended by the 4th Meeting of the ACCOBAMS Scientific Committee (Monaco, November 2006).

3 I. INTRODUCTION First attempts At the 1st Session of the Meeting of the Parties to ACCOBAMS (Monaco, February March 2002), a series of analytical reviews has been presented [1-6, 11] 1 addressing main gaps in conservation and research of Black Sea cetaceans. Besides, regional conservation needs and strategies were considered in general [12], and a number of actions have been proposed as ACCOBAMS International Implementation Priorities for [10]. Among those 18 priorities, adopted by the Parties in Resolution 1.9, most actions (##2 5 and 11 18) concern Black Sea cetaceans to a greater or lesser extent, but one action (#6) is specifically dedicated to preparation of the Conservation Plan for Cetaceans in the Black Sea. According to above priority #6 (see Annex 1), a comprehensive conservation plan should be developed as a result of a certain Black Sea region-wide project prepared in co-operation between the ACCOBAMS and the Black Sea Commission and (hypothetically) funded by the Global Environmental Facility (GEF). A draft concept paper for the initial project proposal [8] was presented at the same meeting in Monaco and countenanced by the Parties. Soon afterwards, the concept was supported in the documents related to the 9th Ministerial Meeting of the Black Sea Commission (Sofia, June 2002), particularly, in recommendations included in the Report on the implementation of the Strategic Action Plan for the Rehabilitation and Protection of the Black Sea [16]. The project s concept was also supported by the 1st Meeting of the ACCOBAMS Scientific Committee (Tunis, October 2002) and by the meeting of the Black Sea Commission s Advisory Group on the Conservation of Biological Diversity (Istanbul, November 2002). Since then, the concept paper underwent considerable modification aimed to improve it in conformity with suggestions offered from UNEP, potential implementing agency regarding this project. A new version of the project s concept [9] has been approved by the 2nd Meeting of the Scientific Committee of ACCOBAMS (Istanbul, November, 2003). The Recommendation 2.4, addressed to the Black Sea countries, was adopted to support as a matter of high urgency the GEF project with human and financial resources (see Annex 2). In spite of negotiation efforts, undertaken by the ACCOBAMS Permanent Secretariat, no noticeable progress in the development of the GEF project was achieved in 2004 and later on. Thus, this way towards the preparation of the Conservation Plan for Black Sea Cetaceans reached a deadlock. Realizable alternative In , several events potentially important for the development of the Conservation Plan for Black Sea Cetaceans have occurred on international and national level. In particular, the Conservation Action Plan for the World's Cetaceans was published by IUCN [15]. Three specific initiatives concerning Black Sea populations of dolphins and porpoises are identified and described in this document for the promotion of conservation-related research and education: 46. Assess abundance and threats to survival of harbour porpoises in the Black Sea and surrounding waters; 47. Investigate the distribution, abundance, population structure, and factors threatening the conservation of short-beaked common dolphins in the Mediterranean and Black Seas; 48. Investigate the distribution and abundance of bottlenose dolphins in the Mediterranean and Black Seas, and evaluate threats to their survival. 1 Figures in square brackets correspond with numbers of references placed at the end of this plan, (see Section V before annexes).

4 Furthermore, the status of small cetaceans in the Black Sea has been reviewed in detail by the Scientific Committee of the International Whaling Commission, IWC (Berlin, May June 2003), and by the IUCN/ACCOBAMS Workshop on the Red List Assessment of Cetaceans in the ACCOBAMS Area (Monaco, March 2006). Clear recommendations have been issued in respect of conservation-oriented research activities required to gain more knowledge on Black Sea cetaceans abundance, distribution, migrations, population structure, life history, ecology, habitat, and anthropogenic threats [17]. In addition, some projects, implemented in the Black Sea countries in (see examples in Annex 3), contributed to better understanding what should be done in the near future for the conservation of cetaceans. Helpful suggestions applicable to the Conservation Plan for Black Sea Cetaceans were offered via the Black Sea Commission for the enforcement of international and national legislation, monitoring, assessment and management of human-cetacean interactions as well as for capacity building, training and public awareness [16]. National action plans for the conservation of Black Sea dolphins and porpoises have been developed in Ukraine (2001) and Romania (2004). One more strategic document [7], aimed to move the preparation of the Conservation Plan for Black Sea Cetaceans out the dead point, was compiled during the first ACCOBAMS training course on cetacean photo-identification (Kalamos, Greece, July 2003). That meeting provided opportunities for the trainees from three Black Sea countries (Ukraine, Russia and Georgia) and their trainers from Italy to discuss the most appropriate actions and prioritize them in order of four categories: management, capacity building, education and awareness, and research and monitoring. The conclusive paper was encouraged at the 2nd Meeting of the ACCOBAMS Scientific Committee (Istanbul, November 2003) and supplemented with additional suggestion offered by Turkish researchers [13]. Insistent need in the Conservation Plan for Black Sea Cetaceans was emphasized again at the 2nd Meeting of the Parties to ACCOBAMS (Palma de Mallorca, November 2004). It was repeatedly stressed that this plan should be based on research and monitoring actions which can fill gaps in the knowledge on present abundance and distribution of Black Sea cetaceans as well as on human-induced threats facing them. The lack of reliable scientific information causes detriment to correct planning of conservation and management activities. The plan presented here has been developed following a request from the ACCOBAMS Permanent Secretariat in accordance with various ideas and suggestions arose from above events and contained in above sources. II. CONSERVATION status of Black Sea cetaceans It is generally recognized that all three Black Sea cetacean species the harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), short-beaked common dolphin (Delphinus delphis) and common bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) experienced a dramatic decline in abundance in the 20th century as a result of large directed catches. Commercial hunting of Black Sea cetaceans was banned in 1966 in the former USSR (present Georgia, Russia and Ukraine), Bulgaria and Romania, and in 1983 in Turkey. However, current fisheries bycatches, extensive habitat degradation and some other anthropogenic impacts pose permanent threats to the continued existence of cetaceans in the Black Sea and contiguous waters represented by the Sea of Azov, Kerch Strait and Turkish Straits System (including the Bosphorus Strait, Marmara Sea and Dardanelles Straits). The riparian states assumed international obligations to protect Black Sea cetaceans as contracting parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS), Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (Berne Convention), Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), Convention on the Protection of the Black Sea Against Pollution (Bucharest

5 Convention), and ACCOBAMS. These instruments should contribute to Black Sea cetacean conservation, especially, the ACCOBAMS and Bucharest Convention. All three Black Sea cetacean species are included in the Indicative list of cetaceans to which ACCOBAMS applies (2002) and in the Provisional List of Species of the Black Sea Importance (2002) annexed to the Black Sea Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Protocol of the Bucharest Convention. The Strategic Action Plan for the Rehabilitation and Protection of the Black Sea (1996) envisages some cetaceans-oriented conservation and research actions in its Paragraph 62 [18]. The harbour porpoise and bottlenose dolphin are listed in Annex II and the common dolphin is mentioned in Annex IV of the EC Directive No. 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats of wild fauna and flora. The Berne Convention s Recommendation No.86 (2001) and Resolution 1.12, adopted by the 1st Meeting of the Parties of ACCOBAMS (2002), are intended to strengthen prohibition measures for deliberate catch, keeping and trade of Black Sea bottlenose dolphins. At the 12th Conference of the Parties to CITES (Santiago, November 2002), a quota of zero for mercantile export of live bottlenose dolphins wild-captured in the Black Sea has been secured. This measure prohibits transboundary transport of captive Black Sea bottlenose dolphins for primarily commercial purposes. Particular concern was expressed by the 1st Meeting of the ACCOBAMS Scientific Committee (Tunis, October 2002; Recommendation 1.2) in view of large and potentially unsustainable bycatches of harbour porpoises in bottom-set gillnet fisheries throughout the Black Sea shelf area. It was concluded that the conservation status of these animals would be greatly improved if existing fisheries regulations restricting fishing effort and the use of certain gear types are enforced. The IWC Sub-Committee on Small Cetaceans (2003) [17] reviewed the status of Black Sea cetaceans in details and concluded that these populations of harbour porpoises, common dolphins and bottlenose dolphins, which are almost completely isolated from their conspecifics in the northeastern Atlantic and Mediterranean Sea, should be considered as the separate and discrete units for conservation purposes. At the same time, it turned out impossible to evaluate fully the status of Black Sea cetaceans due to a lack of basic information. In this respect, the Sub-Committee strongly recommended to improve the conservation-related cetacean research in the region by means of developing the region-wide (a) linetransect surveys, (b) photo-identification programme, (c) genetic analyses of population structure, (d) studies on cetacean life history, (e) comprehensive assessments of man-made threats including the incidental captures in fishing activities, disturbance caused by marine traffic, and past cetacean losses due to the directed catches. The IUCN status In 1996, Black Sea population of the harbour porpoise was inserted as Vulnerable (VU) in the IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals. The conservation status of Black Sea common dolphins and bottlenose dolphins is not evaluated by IUCN until now, although global status, assigned to D. delphis and T. truncatus, is Least Concern (LC) and Data Deficient (DD), correspondingly. 2 However, all three Black Sea cetacean populations are supported by the IUCN Conservation Action Plan for the World's Cetaceans [15]. In May 2005, the 3rd Meeting of the ACCOBAMS Scientific Committee encouraged the initiative proposed by the Cetacean Specialist Group of the IUCN Species Survival Commission (IUCN/SSC/CSG) concerning the development of the IUCN Red List of Mediterranean and Black Sea cetaceans. As a result, the IUCN/ ACCOBAMS Workshop on the Red List Assessment of Cetaceans in the ACCOBAMS Area (Monaco, March 2006) assessed the conservation status of Black Sea populations of the harbour 2 Since 2003, the neighboring population of common dolphins in the Mediterranean Sea is included as Endangered (EN) in the IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals.

6 porpoise, common dolphin and bottlenose dolphin as Endangered (EN) and confirmed their belonging to the Black Sea subspecies Phocoena phocoena relicta Abel, 1905; Delphinus delphis ponticus Barabasch- Nikiforov, 1935; and Tursiops truncatus ponticus Barabasch, The excerpts from the Checklists for Red List Assessments containing the justification summaries of the status of Black Sea cetacean subspecies/populations are enclosed as Annex 4 to this Conservation Plan. The summaries represent a quintessence of thorough expert evaluation of current knowledge regarding Black Sea cetaceans and major threats affecting them, and thus, would help to put the Conservation Plan into context of available scientific data making more intelligible the need of different actions proposed. According to the IUCN Red List procedure, these assessments should be further reviewed by independent evaluators from IUCN/SSC/CSG and then submitted to IUCN/SSC for final consideration. It may be expected that this process will take about one year or somewhat more, so, hopefully, the new IUCN status of Black Sea cetaceans will be established before the end of III. GENERAL APPROACH, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The Conservation Plan for Black Sea Cetaceans is created based on a strategy designed by ACCOBAMS and reflected in its Annex 2, the Conservation Plan; is intended to complement the existing ACCOBAMS Implementation Priorities for , and Priority #6 in the first place, addressing cetacean conservation, management and research in the Black Sea. It is fully corresponds to the ACCOBAMS Working Programme , Resolutions of the 1st and 2nd Meetings of the Parties to ACCOBAMS, Recommendations and decisions of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Meetings of the ACCOBAMS Scientific Committee; is aimed to facilitate the co-operation among Black Sea riparian states and enhance their abilities essential for the conservation of cetaceans and their habitats; envisages common mechanisms aimed to promote cetacean conservation and research actions, as well as capacity building, education and public awareness in the Black Sea subregion under the co-ordination role of ACCOBAMS institutions including the Meeting of the Parties, Permanent Secretariat, Bureau, Scientific Committee and, last but not least, Black Sea Co-ordination Unit represented by the Commission on the Protection of the Black Sea Against Pollution (the Black Sea Commission); expects that it will be adopted and promoted by all Black Sea countries, including those which are still not the Parties of ACCOBAMS, regardless of existing national differences in the available expertise, level of organization, scientific backgrounds and logistical constraints among areas; expects also that its implementation will derive adequate support from national, regional, European and global agencies, intended for nature protection and sustainable development, and thus, will be provided with various sources to fund collaborative projects focused on the Black Sea cetaceans conservation. The principal goals of this plan are to provide a framework and priority actions whereby the Black Sea Community (scientists, fishermen, industry, NGOs, local and national governments, and appropriate intergovernmental organisations) can in the short-term ( ) begin to practically improve the conservation status of Black Sea cetaceans, and in particular obtain the necessary scientific information to allow a full long-term conservation plan to be developed at the end of the period and effective management decisions to be made.

7 The actions presented below are grouped into six sections in accordance with basic objectives wholly correspondent with appropriate items of the ACCOBAMS Conservation Plan: Consolidation of international and national legal system Assessment and management of human-cetacean interactions Habitat protection Research and monitoring Capacity building, collection and dissemination of information, training and education Responses to emergency situations IV. ACTIONS All 18 actions proposed (their descriptions are presented on pp ) are important for the conservation of Black Sea cetaceans. The order of the actions follows above objectives (i.e. corresponds to a format of the ACCOBAMS Conservation Plan) and their numbering does not indicate priorities. These actions consist of 57 smaller actions or sub-actions (activities) which were prioritized according their significance (primary and secondary) in the relation to each other (some actions are clearly more urgent or definitely propaedeutic to others). The priority scores are included in separate cell of the descriptions. Besides, some actions are already on the way of their implementation and that is also underlined in the descriptions. Special attention to the prioritization of the actions was devoted at the Round Table on the Conservation of Black Sea Cetaceans (Istanbul, Turkey, May 2006; see the minutes in Annex 5). The actions and sub-actions of primary priority are listed in Table 1. It should also note the interactive nature between the various categories of actions and the actions within categories. In particular, the Research and Monitoring section is absolutely crucial to provide the necessary background to almost all of the other groups of actions (particularly to the Assessment and Management of Human-Cetacean Interactions). In its turn, the Basic Cetacean Surveys action is the most important within the Research and Monitoring category. Synoptic Table 2 listing the main 18 actions (see next page) helps to understand the synergies of different actions and functional links between them. The implementation of the Conservation Plan for Black Sea Cetaceans is estimated for a five-year period ( ; see Recommendation of the ACCOBAMS Scientific Committee in Annex 6). This term seems to be realistic under the stipulation that proper planning, coordination and monitoring of the actions proposed is established and adequate methodological, financial and logistical support is provided. This can be ensured under auspices of the ACCOBAMS, Black Sea Commission and their institutions. The establishing a position of this plan coordinator could be helpful.

8 Table 1. Conservation Plan for Black Sea Cetaceans: Actions and activities of high priority URG activities addressed as a matter of urgency (Istanbul Round Table, May 2006) Actions Activities (sub-actions) 1 Broadening the ACCOBAMS scope (a) promotion of accession of the Russian Federation and Turkey to ACCOBAMS 2 Proper conservation status of cetacean populations (a) proper listing Black Sea cetaceans in the IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals (b) providing correct references to the IUCN status of Black Sea cetaceans in relevant international instruments 3 Cetacean conservation approach in fishery regulations (a) adopting the Black Sea legally binding document for fisheries and conservation of marine living resources 4 Improvement and harmonization of national legislation (a) improvement of national legislation in respect of international requirements on the conservation of cetaceans 6 Strategy for reducing cetacean bycatches (a) establishment of a regional bycatch network URG (b) estimation of bycatch levels and temporal and geographical distribution of bycatches (c) evaluation of sustainable bycatch levels for each cetacean species (d) investigation of effects causing by mitigation measures includig pingers and acoustically reflective nets (f) developing management objectives for reducing bycatches in the Black Sea region 8 Elimination of live capture of Black Sea cetaceans (a) improvement of control assigned to eliminate live capture of cetaceans (b) preparation and adoption of national legal acts banning any intentonal capture of Black Sea cetaceans 11 Network of existing protected areas eligible for cetaceans (a) assessment of existing protected areas with regard to their relevance to cetacean conservation (b) developing the regional network of eligible protected areas URG (с) preparation of the network s cetaceans-oriented strategy, action plan and guidelines (d) protected areas involved in the network should restrain human activities potentially harmful for cetaceans 12 Special marine protected areas for cetacean conservation (a) developing management plans and creating ad hoc marine protection areas in the defined localities 13 Basic cetacean surveys (a) carrying out region-wide survey and assessment of cetacean abundance, distribution and hot spots URG (b) carrying out cetacean survey in the Turkish Straits System 15 Regional cetacean stranding network (a) developing the existing national CSNs with their functional fusion into the basin-wide network URG (b) developing a Black Sea regional database of cetacean strandings (c) establishing cetacean tissue bank(s) accumulating samples from stranded and bycaught cetaceans (d) multidisciplinary study of samples collected from stranded and bycaught animals 18 Measures for responding to emergency situations (a) assessment of emergency situations demanding special response (e.g. rescue-and-release operations) (b) developing guidelines on how to respond to emergency situations affecting Black Sea cetaceans (c) developing regional strategy (contingency plan) and national teams for responding to emergency situations

9 Broadening the ACCOBAMS scope Proper conservation status of cetacean populations Cetacean conservation approach in fishery regulations Improvement and harmonization of national legislation Retrospective analysis of human-induced cetacean mortality Strategy for reducing cetacean bycatches Mitigation of conflicts between cetaceans and fishery Elimination of live capture of Black Sea cetaceans Mitigation of disturbance caused by shipping Management of threats from gas-and-oil producing industry Network of existing protected areas eligible for cetaceans Special marine protected areas for cetacean conservation Basic cetacean surveys Cetacean photo-identification programme Regional cetacean stranding network Strategies for capacity building and raising awareness Access to information and cetacean libraries Measures for responding to emergency situations Table 2. Conservation Plan for Black Sea Cetaceans: Links between actions proposed Actions Broadening the ACCOBAMS scope X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 2 Proper conservation status of cetacean populations X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 3 Cetacean conservation approach in fishery regulations X X X X X X X X X X 4 Improvement and harmonization of national legislation X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 5 Retrospective analysis of human-induced cetacean mortality X X X X X X X X X X X X 6 Strategy for reducing cetacean bycatches X X X X X X X X X X X X 7 Mitigation of conflicts between cetaceans and fishery X X X X X X X X X 8 Elimination of live capture of Black Sea cetaceans X X X X X X X X 9 Mitigation of disturbance caused by shipping X X X X X X X X X 10 Management of threats from gas-and-oil producing industry X X X X X X X X X X 11 Network of existing protected areas eligible for cetaceans X X X X X X X X X 12 Special marine protected areas for cetacean conservation X X X X X X X X X X X X 13 Basic cetacean surveys X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 14 Cetacean photo-identification programme X X X X X X X X X X X 15 Regional cetacean stranding network X X X X X X X X X X X X 16 Strategies for capacity building and raising awareness X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 17 Access to information and cetacean libraries X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 18 Measures for responding to emergency situations X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

10 CONSOLIDATION OF REGIONAL AND NATIONAL LEGAL SYSTEM (Actions 1 4)

11 ACTION 1: Broadening the ACCOBAMS scope Aim Targets Recommended actions Priority Responsible actors Achieve that all six Black Sea riparian states are the Contracting Parties to ACCOBAMS; disseminate the ACCOBAMS process in the countries which have indirect outlet to the Black Sea through the rivers and exert their influence on the Black Sea environment and biota (including cetaceans) by means of fluvial discharges and marine-riverine traffic. Rationale / Background Accession of the Russian Federation and Turkey to ACCOBAMS. States of the Black Sea basin, which have no direct outlet to the Black Sea, are involved in negotiations concerning their possible participation in ACCOBAMS. (a) Promote accession of the Russian Federation and Turkey to ACCOBAMS. This action should have positive influence on the concerted region-wide implementation of all other activities proposed in this plan (links to Actions 2 18). (b) Initiate the ACCOBAMS awareness process in those European states which are connected with the Black Sea via rivers. Note: States where the Danube is flowing through (most of which are EU Member States) should be made aware of the effects on Black Sea cetaceans and their habitat of discharging certain substances in the river. It could be helpful if the Black Sea Comission is involved in promoting such awareness in cooperation with the European Comission. Primary Secondary ACCOBAMS Secretariat and Secretariat of the Black Sea Commission (Black Sea SRCU of ACCOBAMS) Up to date, four Black Sea coastal states ratified the ACCOBAMS. They are Bulgaria, Georgia, Romania and Ukraine. The rest two riparian countries, Russia and Turkey, are not the Contracting Parties yet. The both states did not sign the Final Act of the Negotiation Meeting to adopt the ACCOBAMS. Nevertheless, they show willingness to protect Black Sea cetaceans by means of national legislation and in the framework of the Bucharest Convention and some other relevant multilateral treaties. Thus, those states should be considered as potential partners within the ACCOBAMS process. A total of 22 countries belong to the Black Sea drainage basin. Except above six riparian states, most of them (e.g. Austria, Czechia, Germany, Hungary, Switzerland, etc.) are connected with the Black Sea via Danube and Dnieper rivers. It could be envisaged, that these European countries are able, in theory, to affect the Black Sea ecosystem and cetaceans as its hierarchs (top predators) due to river-borne pollution and disturbance caused by the navigation between the sea and rivers. Thus, the involvement of such states in the ACCOBAMS seems to be reasonable.

12 ACTION 2: Proper conservation status of cetacean populations Aim Target Recommended actions Priority Responsible actors Ensure that Black Sea cetacean species the harbour porpoise, the shortbeaked common dolphin and the common bottlenose dolphin are properly classified in the international documents aimed to protect the Black Sea environment, ecosystems, living resources and biodiversity. Correct evaluation and application of the IUCN conservation status of Black Sea cetacean populations. (a) The evaluation of the IUCN conservation status of Black Sea cetacean subspecies/populations should be finalized and proper listing assured in the IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals. (b) Correct references to the IUCN status of Black Sea cetaceans should be provided in relevant documents of international and Black Sea regional significance. (c) The status of Black Sea cetaceans should be periodically reevaluated in the future in accordance with the updated knowledge of their biology, ecology and threats, including results of the anticipated basin-wide survey aimed to gain reliable information on cetaceans abundance and distribution. Links to Actions 3 6, 8 10, and are anticipated. Primary Secondary ACCOBAMS Scientific Committee, IUCN/SSC Cetacean Specialist Group, IUCN Species Survival Commission, Secretariat of the Black Sea Commission, ACCOBAMS Secretariat Rationale / Background Since 1996, the Black Sea population of harbour porpoises is inserted as Vulnerable (VU) in the IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals, while the conservation status of Black Sea common dolphins and bottlenose dolphins was not assessed by IUCN till recently, and globally these two species Delphinus delphis and Tursiops truncatus are listed by IUCN, correspondingly, as Least Concern (LC) and Data Deficient (DD). Nevertheless, all three Black Sea cetacean species/populations are listed as DD in the regional Black Sea Red Data Book (1999) and, at the same time, as Endangered (EN) in the Provisional List of Species of the Black Sea Importance the document constituting integral part (Annex 2) of the Black Sea Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Protocol (2002) to the Bucharest Convention. The both latter appraisals were not examined by international cetacean experts. In May 2005, the 3rd Meeting of the ACCOBAMS Scientific Committee encouraged the initiative proposed by the Cetacean Specialist Group of the IUCN Species Survival Commission (IUCN/SSC/CSG) concerning the development of the IUCN Red List of Mediterranean and Black Sea cetaceans. As a result, the IUCN/ACCOBAMS Workshop on the Red List Assessment of Cetaceans in the ACCOBAMS Area (Monaco, March 2006) assessed the status of Black Sea populations of the harbour porpoise, common dolphin and bottlenose dolphin as EN and confirmed their belonging to the Black Sea subspecies of small cetaceans (Phocoena phocoena relicta, Delphinus delphis ponticus and Tursiops truncatus ponticus). According to the IUCN Red List procedure, these assessments should be further reviewed by two independent CSG evaluators and then submitted to IUCN/SSC for final consideration.

13 ACTION 3: Cetacean conservation approach in fishery regulations Aim Target Recommended actions Priority Responsible actors Ensure that Black Sea intergovernmental agreements and national regulations, purposed to manage Black Sea living resources and their exploitation, include items concerned in the conservation of cetaceans. Rationale / Background Regional and national instruments regulating fisheries are in full correspondence with a goal to protect Black Sea cetacean populations. (a) The Legally Binding Document (LBD) for Fisheries and Conservation of Living Resources should be adopted by the Black Sea states. (b) The riparian countries should ensure compliance of their national fisheries regulations with above document stating the necessity of prohibition of any harvesting of marine mammals; reduction of incidental catches of cetaceans at least to sustainable level; and tight cooperation with ACCOBAMS. Links to Actions 1, 2, 4 8, 16 and 17 could be helpful. Primary Secondary Black Sea Commission and Black Sea Range States represented by appropriate authorities (including ACCOBAMS national focal points) Black Sea international and national legislation on the management and use of marine living resources is not adequately developed yet. The overfishing and devastating illegal fishing became common region-wide problems causing mass accidental mortality of harbour porpoises in fishing gear and depletion of cetaceans forage sources. In order to rehabilitate the Black Sea ecosystem and achieve sustainable fisheries in the Black Sea, the fisheries management policies need to be improved. The Strategic Action Plan for the Rehabilitation and Protection of the Black Sea [18] envisages that the Black Sea coastal states should expedite the development of the Fisheries Convention and improve their national regulations on fisheries. On the way towards the Black Sea Fisheries Convention, the intermediate Legally Binding Document (LBD) for Fisheries and Conservation of Living Resources of the Black Sea has been drafted by the Black Sea Commission (2002). This draft document includes some meaningful items devoted to the conservation of cetaceans.

14 ACTION 4: Improvement and harmonization of national legislation Aim Target Recommended actions Priority Responsible actors Ensure that in the Black Sea states their laws intended to regulate conservation activities, sustainable use and management of marine environment and resources are brought in accordance with international legislation standards related to cetacean conservation. Rationale / Background National legislative acts are in compliance with international treaties protecting Black Sea cetaceans and their habitats. (a) National legislation should be improved paying due respect to international requirements concerning the conservation of cetaceans. (b) All species/populations of Black Sea cetaceans should be properly classified in national instruments bearing on the management and conservation of marine organisms and their habitats. Appropriate research data should provide solid base for the (re-)assessment of national conservation status of Black Sea cetaceans in all six riparian countries. Note: Links to Actions 1 3, 5 11, and will be useful. In particular, see Action 2 as a pattern of similar activity on the regional level. It is envisaged that national conservation status of cetacean species may be diverse in different countries and may differ from the regional one. Primary Secondary Black Sea Range States represented by appropriate authorities, ACCOBAMS focal points and experts. The coordination role of the Secretariat of the Black Sea Commission is expected In the Black Sea countries cetaceans are protected by national laws and appropriate subordinate acts. For instance, in Ukraine these species are protected by the Animal World Law and the Law on the Red Data Book of Ukraine. At the same time, all riparian states are contracting parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Biological Diversity (CBD), Bucharest Convention and CITES. Some Black Sea states are parties to the ACCOBAMS, Bonn Convention (CMS), Berne Convention and Whaling Convention managed by the International Whaling Commission (IWC). In accordance with their specific goals, the above multilateral instruments protect cetaceans and cetacean habitats and should strengthen the conservation status of dolphins and porpoises in the Black Sea states. Meanwhile, at present there is no comprehensive assessment of the conservation status of any Black Sea cetacean species in any riparian state. National laws are in need to be brought in full correspondence with international obligations of the Black Sea countries.

15 ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF HUMAN-CETACEAN INTERACTIONS (Actions 5 10)

16 ACTION 5: Retrospective analysis of human-induced cetacean mortality Aim Target Recommended actions Priority Responsible actors Investigate the feasibility of obtaining meaningful estimates of human-induced cetacean mortality over the 20th century with the view of historical reconstruction of the 'initial' population sizes and, thereby, more clear evaluation of present status and trends of Black Sea cetacean populations. Adjusted understanding of population dynamics in the past and at present. (a) Preliminary study should be carried out to check up potential realizability of detailed assessment of human-induced cetacean mortality in bygone years. (b) If the revealed archival datasets appear to be accessible and suitable for such examination, the assessment should be performed and then the acquired information on cetacean removals will serve the reconstruction of past population sizes via modelling. (c) Assessment of historical data with their reference to the current status of the three Black Sea cetacean species would provide better understanding of population dynamics. Note: These activities are linked to Actions 1 4, 6 8, 13 and In case of direct kills, above approach will require estimation of species ratios, product conversion factors and methods to account for hunting loss, so that aggregate data on total cetaceans landed by weight can be converted to removals by species, area and year. Secondary Cetacean experts and relevant national authorities (including ACCOBAMS focal points) in co-operation with the Secretariat of the Black Sea Commission (Black Sea SRCU of ACCOBAMS) Rationale / Background Uncontrolled directed takes were the major threat to cetaceans in the Black Sea until a total ban on this harvest was imposed in All three species were harvested for oil, meal and other products from the 1830s (as minimum) throughout most of the 20th century. As many as four to five million individuals may have been removed during this time. Besides, other sources of human-induced mortality (mainly bycatch in fishing gear, but also accidents at sea and fatal live-capture operations) contributed to cetacean losses.

17 ACTION 6: Strategy for reducing cetacean bycatches Aim Target Recommended actions Priority Responsible actors Develop a system of concordant measures able to decrease cetacean mortality in fishing gear at least to sustainable levels, with ultimate longterm goal of reducing it to zero if possible. Rationale / Background Regional strategy for reducing bycatches adopted by Black Sea countries on the base of valid scientific reasoning and clarification dialog with fishing steakholders. (a) Establishment of a regional bycatch network. (b) Estimation of bycatch levels (by fishing gear type and cetacean species) and the temporal and geographical distribution of bycatches (and fishing effort by gear type) for legal fisheries and for illegal, unreported or unregulated (IUU) fishing, and for ghost fishing by abandoned nets. (c) Evaluation of sustainable bycatch levels for each cetacean species with regard to their present distribution and abundance (link to Action 13) and past human-induced removals (link to Action 5) analysed, in particular, by means of population modelling. (d) Investigation of potential mitigation measures from scientific and socioeconomic perspective, including practicality and implications of using pingers and acoustically reflective nets and their possible effects on other components of the ecosystem. (f) Developing agreed management objectives for reducing bycatches in the Black Sea region, with a focussing on co-operation with fishing community. Notes: These activities should be implemented in accordance with ACCOBAMS BYCAMS project. On application of the activities, the first priority should be given to harbour porpoise bycatches caused by bottom-set gillnet fisheries. Actions (a), (d) and (f) could be implemented by respective workshop(s). Among other management objectives, the time/area closure option and development of marine protection areas (link to Action 12) should be considered. Cetacean carcasses found in fishing gear should be available for postmortem examination and sampling; links to cetacean stranding networks and tissue banks (Action 15) as well as to cetacean rescue teams (Action 18) are recommended. The connecion with Actions 1 4, 7, 16 and 17 is also envisaged. Primary Cetacean experts and relevant national authoriies in co-operation with the Secretariat of the Black Sea Commission and its Advisory Group on the Environmental Aspects of Management of Fisheries and Other Living Resources, and ACCOBAMS Scientific Committee Bycatches are the major source of human-induced mortality of Black Sea cetaceans. All three species are known to be taken as bycatch, although incidental takes of harbour porpoises evoke the greatest concern. Porpoises are caught in a variety of fisheries, but for all that the bottom-set gillnets for turbot, spiny dogfish and sturgeon pose particular threat to their population. Such bycatches occur in the Azov Sea and Kerch Strait and throughout shelf area of the Black Sea including territorial waters of all six riparian countries. Preliminary indications suggest that annual rate of harbour porpoise bycatches can be numbered in thousands, with a peak in April June during the turbot fishing season. It is known that illegal, unreported or unregulated (IUU) fishing is widespread in the Black Sea suggesting that significant part of bycatches takes place due to this kind of human activity. So far, no special attempts have been made to mitigate cetacean bycatches in the Black Sea region. The acoustic deterrent devices (pingers) and acoustically reflective fishing gear were never used here.

18 ACTION 7: Mitigation of conflicts between cetaceans and fishery Aim Target Recommended actions Priority Responsible actors Address the problem of adverse cetacean/fisheries interactions (other than bycatches) and develop measures for this problem solution. Regional approach to the mitigation and prevention of conflict interactions between fishery and cetaceans including dolphin depredation and prejudicial actions of fishermen. (a) Evaluation of the magnitude, temporal and geographical scope of adverse cetacean/fisheries interactions (by fishing categories and cetacean species), including clarification of roles of the involved parties in: - prey competition and depletion of fish resources; - deterioration of fishing grounds/cetacean foraging areas; - confinement of fishing operational capabilities and living conditions of cetaceans; - so-called dolphin depredation and retaliatory measures from fishermen. Secondary Cetacean experts and relevant national authorities in co-operation with the Secretariat of the Black Sea Commission and its Advisory Group on the Environmental Aspects of Management of Fisheries and Other Living Resources, and ACCOBAMS Scientific Committee (b) Socio-economic study and modeling of adverse cetacean/fisheries interactions on the base of above action and results of basin-wide cetacean survey (link to Action 13). (c) Developing strategies for mitigating conflict interactions in collaboration with fishery specialists. Link to Action 6 may be particularly helpful, although links to Actions 1, 3 5, 16 and 17 are also reasonable. Note: These actions should be implemented in accordance with ACCOBAMS BYCAMS project. Recommendations of the ACCOBAMS Workshop on Interactions between Dolphins and Fisheries in the Mediterranean: Evaluation of Mitigation Alternatives [14] should be taken into consideration. Rationale / Background Anecdotal notes of beneficial cooperation between Black Sea fishermen and cetaceans are quite dubious, whereas conflicts between them, causing troubles to the both sides, appear to be a real problem. Along with bycatches (see Action 6), fisheries provoke a number of other effects on bottlenose dolphins, common dolphins and harbour porpoises including: changes (diminution or increase) of their foraging potentiality; modification of feeding strategy and behaviour; deterioration of habitats; alteration of distribution pattern and migration ability. These impacts are poorly studied and understood. No reliable data have been presented to refute or support speculations on suspected prey competition between dolphins and humans, although some cases are known when bottlenose dolphins raised trouble to fishermen by damaging their nets or catch, or stealing caught fish from the nets. No statistics are available on such conflicts and respective financial losses, and no appropriate compensation is stipulated for fishermen from their governments. In the Black Sea region there is no management procedure or even approach to address and mitigate dolphin depredation as well as eliminate cruel retaliatory actions resulting sometimes in dolphin deaths.

19 ACTION 8: Elimination of live capture of Black Sea cetaceans Aim Target Recommended actions Priority Responsible actors Restrain intentional removal of live cetaceans from the wild. Complete ban on live captures for commercial, military and other purposes except urgent needs concerned with the conservation of cetaceans according to ACCOBAMS objectives. 3 (a) Improve the control to eliminate any live capture of cetaceans in the Black Sea and contiguous maritime areas. (b) Prepare and adopt relevant national legislative acts (or make appropriate amendments to existing laws) banning any intentonal capture of Black Sea cetaceans. (c) Evaluate the level, time/location characteristics, legality and biological features (sex, age, etc.) of bottlenose dolphin removals in the past. (d) Evaluate the impact of past removals on Black Sea bottlenose dolphin population in general and on local communities of this species which were the objects of capture operations. Links to Actions 1 5, 13, 16 and 17 could be helpful. Primary Secondary Cetacean experts and relevant national authorities in co-operation with the Secretariat of the Black Sea Commission, ACCOBAMS Secretariat and CITES Secretariat Rationale / Background Directed lethal takes of Black Sea cetaceans are banned in the entire region, and cetacean live captures are prohibited (or can not be permitted) in the countries-parties of ACCOBAMS (Bulgaria, Georgia, Romania and Ukraine) in concordance with Article II.1 of the Agreement. However, the live captures still may take place in other two Black Sea states which are not contracting parties to ACCOBAMS. At present ( ), only Russia uses this opportunity issuing permits for the catching live bottlenose dolphins in its internal waters. There have been a number of initiatives to eliminate such practice, including the Berne Convention s Recommendation No.86 (2001) and Resolution 1.12 adopted by the 1st Meeting of the Parties of ACCOBAMS (2002). In 2002, CITES set a zero annual export quota for live specimens of Black Sea bottlenose dolphins removed from the wild and traded for primarily commercial purposes, and the Black Sea Commission adopted the Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Protocol as an annex to the Bucharest Convention. Both last instruments do not address directly the issue of cetacean live capture, however, they create the necessary prerequisites for respective improvement of national legislation. 3 As consistent with Article II.2 of the ACCOBAMS, any Party may grant an exception to the prohibition of deliberate taking of cetaceans only in emergency situations (major pollution events, important strandings or epizootics) as provided for paragraph 6 (Responses to Emergency Situations) of the ACCOBAMS Conservation Plan (Annex 2 to the Agreement), or, after having obtained the advice of the ACCOBAMS Scientific Committee, for the purpose of non-lethal in situ research aimed at maintaining a favourable conservation status for cetaceans; the Party concerned shall immediately inform the ACCOBAMS Bureau and Scientific Committee, through the Agreement Secretariat, of any such exception that has been granted; the Secretariat shall inform all Parties of the exception without delay by the most appropriate means.

20 ACTION 9: Mitigation of disturbance caused by shipping Aim Target Recommended actions Priority Responsible actors Address the problem of adverse impact of heavy marine traffic on Black Sea cetacean populations and develop appropriate conservation/management measures. Regional strategy for reducing negative effects of shipping/cetacean interactions. (a) Evaluation of the magnitude, temporal and spatial characteristics of marine traffic levels by shipping categories and integrally in comparison with past and present data on cetacean distribution, migrations and abundance. Links to the results of basin-wide cetacean survey (Action 13) and photo-identification programme (Action 14) would be particularly helpful for this analysis. (b) Assessment of shipping/cetacean interactions (including direct collisions and disturbance caused by vessel noise) in the areas representing important cetacean habitats affected by intense marine traffic. Research schemes should be designed in collaboration with specialists experienced in hydro- and bioacoustics, and cetaceans behaviour. Secondary Institutions involved in cetacean research and conservation in co-operation with agencies and services protecting the Black Sea and managing the navigation (c) Developing management strategies for reducing adverse impact of the marine traffic on Black Sea cetaceans, with strong emphasis on co-operation with Black Sea shipping companies and other stakeholders. Links to Actions 1, 2, 4, 12, and could be helpful. (d) As long as above strategies are completed, in order to start the mitigation of cetacean disturbance as early as possible, certain guidelines should be prepared and disseminated among shipping companies, vessel crews, harbor authorities and other identified audiences (link to Action 16). Rationale / Background The intensity of navigation increased dramatically in recent decades throughout the Black Sea, but mainly in coastal waters representing primary habitat of harbour porpoises and bottlenose dolphins. In general, the marine traffic has a strong tendency to increase along the predetermined shipping lanes and in the areas surrounding big harbors; it shows annual trend to rise during warm season with a summer peak due to the growth of tourist activities. Marine traffic in the Turkish Straits System is particularly heavy with an obvious hot spot in the Bosporus Strait. The Kerch Strait is another area where impacts of vessel traffic on cetaceans may be especially acute. It could be suspected that the shipping is important source of cetacean disturbance causing a series of negative effects such as possible extrusion of dolphins and porpoises from preferable habitats, alteration of their migration ways and modification of their behaviour resulting ultimately on population level in the reducing of foraging and reproductive success. However, to date there was no any study of adverse impact of the shipping on Black Sea cetaceans and no special measures have been proposed to mitigate this potential threat. The Bosporus and Kerch Strait seem to be preferable pilot areas where this conservation problem could be addressed.